the lost treasures of ipiutak Jacques Marc Underwater Archaeological Society of British Columbia, 2527 Mill Hill Road, Victoria, BC V9B 4X5; [email protected]

abstract

The Ipiutak culture of northwestern ranks among the most mysterious and intriguing traditions of the northern world. The site, excavated in the late 1930s and early 1940s by Danish archaeologist Helge Larsen and American archaeologists and J. Louis Giddings, is located near the modern village of Point Hope. Artifacts recovered from the initial excavations included jet-inlaid ivory death masks, ivory carvings, dance pendants, hunting implements, and more. A shipment of the finest artifacts was sent to the American Museum of Natural History in New York to be photographed for publication purposes. These Ipiutak materials were shipped back to the University of Alaska Museum in September 1946. In November of that year, the U.S. Post Office informed the Museum of Natural History that a letter and specimen list sent two days in advance of the artifacts were lost when a U.S. Army Transport ship sank. In the summer of 2003, the Canadian Coast Guard (CCG) received a re- port that something was producing an oil sheen on the water surface about 1.35 nautical miles south- east of James Point on the west side of Grenville Channel, British Columbia. In October 2003, the CCG deployed a remotely operated vehicle (ROV) to investigate the source of the pollution. During their inspection they determined that the source of the oil was a shipwreck. Research established that the ship was most likely that of the U.S. Army Transport Brigadier General M. G. Zalinski. This paper will investigate whether she is the missing army transport that was transporting the Ipiutak artifacts.

the ipiutak site

The Ipiutak archaeological site, situated on an accretional Rainey 1948:5). At the time, Larsen was a curator in the spit near the modern village of Point Hope, Alaska, has re- Danish National Museum while Rainey was a professor ceived considerable publicity and provoked speculation on of anthropology at the University of Alaska. Larsen and the culture of the inhabitants, resulting not least from the Rainey, accompanied by J. Louis Giddings, made their extensive habitation remains and the variety and quantity first expedition to Point Hope and Ipiutak in the summer of carved ivory and other artworks (Bandi 1969; Giddings of 1939 and continued their work in the field and in the 1967; Hilton et al. 2014). The site was identified in 1939 laboratory for three years. In the summer of 1941 they were by archaeologists Helge Larsen of Denmark and Froelich joined by Harry L. Shapiro of the American Museum of Rainey of the United States, who were searching for traces Natural History (AMNH), who supervised the excavation of early “Eskimo” settlements. They chose to examine the of the Tigara burials and made anthropometric measure- Ipiutak site (Fig. 1) after recalling a comment made by ments of the Inuit then living at Point Hope. Danish anthropologist Knud Rasmussen that the old vil- The archaeological work at Ipiutak began on areas lage of Tigara at Point Hope was one of the largest and where cultural material was exposed, then house sites most interesting sites along the Arctic Coast (Larsen and were studied, and finally graves were excavated (Giddings

88 the lost treasures of ipiutak 1967; Larsen and Rainey 1948). Restricted to one area of Museum, and the American Museum of Natural History the site, the elaborate nature of the graves at Ipiutak was (AMNH) (West 1978). The “best” artistic specimens and uncharacteristic of the Inuit (Larson and Rainey 1948:61; other artifacts to be illustrated in Larson and Rainey’s re- Mason 2016). Not only were the grave accessories dif- port, Ipiutak and the Arctic Whale Hunting Culture (1948), ferent from those of other known Bering Strait cultures, were sent to the AMNH to be photographed for the pro- the manner of some burials was also remarkable. Some duction of plates to be inserted into the report. Later, graves held bodies with composite ivory “death masks” when these items were shipped back to the University of (Fig. 2) and skulls with eyes of inlaid jet and ivory. Some Alaska Museum on a U.S. Army Transport (USAT) ship, graves held mummified birds or other animals, again with they were lost at sea. eyes inlaid with obsidian. In several graves, the human body was buried with bones; in four others, hu- loss of ipiutak artifacts mans were buried with dog skeletons (Larsen and Rainey 1948:61, 248). The excavations at Ipiutak produced some To determine what happened to the artifacts has meant 10,000 artifacts and 500 skeletons, and Rainey estimated reviewing the correspondence record about the artifacts. the site could have supported a population of 5000 people. The trail of clues begins at the AMNH. On September 16, Radiocarbon assays suggest that the site was founded prior 1946, Bella Weitzner, associate curator of ethnology at the to ad 600, with an upper age limit in the ninth century AMNH, wrote a letter to Ivar Skarland at the University (Mason 2006). of Alaska. She apologized for the delay in returning the World War II interrupted the research and analysis artifacts and explained that with Larsen and Rainey out of work: Rainey entered U.S. government service in 1942, the country, the task of checking the material belonging to and Giddings joined the U.S. Navy in 1943. Rainey’s the three institutions had fallen to her, it had been a long absence placed the bulk of the library research and the and drawn-out task, and she had finally reached a stage of writing on Larsen, who was on the staff of the University of Alaska Museum from 1943 to 1945. In 1945, Larsen divided the large collection of Ipiutak material housed in the University of Alaska Museum into specimens to be retained by the University of Alaska Museum, the Danish

Figure 2. Burial mask from lpiutak grave site, published as plate 55 in Larsen and Rainey (1948). Courtesy of the Division of Figure 1. Location of Ipiutak and Tigara sites at Point Hope and Anthropology, American Museum of Natu- Grenville Channel. Map by Robert Clark. ral History Catalog #60.1/7713 A-K.

Alaska Journal of Anthropology vol. 15, nos. 1&2 (2017) 89 completion that made it possible to return the specimens loss of usat brigadier general belonging to the university. Her letter continues: m. g. zalinski You will find that the specimens have been wrapped and labeled according to their plate and figure The Brigadier General M. G. Zalinski was originally numbers. Since we always use the catalog num- launched as the steel freighter Lake Frohna in July 1919. bers as part of the record when specimens are pub- She was an ocean freighter of the typical three-island, lished, it would be necessary for you to give us the four-hatch, two-mast type (Fig. 3). Her registered length University of Alaska catalog numbers for each one was 251 feet, the width 43.5 feet, and the depth 26.16 feet. of these pieces. Will you be good enough, therefore She had a gross tonnage of 2616 and net tonnage of 1611. to enter your catalog number in the proper place on each of the work sheets for the plates, a set of which When the United States entered the Second World we are forwarding with this letter? Please return War in December 1941, the U.S. Army’s Quartermaster the sheets to me when you have filled in the catalog Corps requisitioned the ship and renamed her USAT number. (Weitzner 1946a) Brigadier General M. G. Zalinski. The transport ship was Weitzner (1946b) wrote a follow-up letter to Skarland then put into service running supplies north to Alaska out on November 7 inquiring if the Ipiutak materials had of Seattle, its port of embarkation throughout World War reached the University of Alaska safely. She also requested II and after the war. The Puget Sound Pilots movements that the list of specimen numbers be returned, so that cards reveal the final movements of the Brigadier General the captions for the photographs taken for Larsen and M. G. Zalinski. She sailed from Seattle on June 8, 1946, Rainey’s report could be completed (Weitzner 1946b). returned, and then left again for Alaska on July 10. The University of Alaska archaeologist J. Louis Giddings re- cargo ship was back in Seattle on August 9 and left again sponded on behalf of Skarland on November 11. Giddings on August 23. (1946) explained that a West Coast shipping strike had Archie McLaren, the purser on board Zalinski, re- held up express and freight shipments to the Territory of called that his ship left Seattle for the final time in the Alaska for two months, and cessation of the strike was early-morning hours on September 26, 1946, bound for not yet in sight. He indicated he would try to provide Whittier, Alaska (McLaren 1988). TheZalinski was re- the requested information as soon as the Ipiutak material ported to be carrying 1,115 tons of food and 778 tons was received Weitzner (1946c) wrote back on November of general cargo. Included in this cargo were household 18 stating that “unfortunately a day or two after I wrote goods for military personnel and a full load of fresh fruit to Mr. Skarland on November 7th we were notified by and produce. John Fitzgerald from the National Archives 1 the Post Office that the army transport carrying the letter in Seattle found the USAT Ocean Manifest. It records and the accompanying lists was sunk and presumably the that Zalinski loaded at Pier 36 with U.S. mail consigned to mail it carried was lost.” the postmaster in Whittier. The quantity and weight were She noted that the Ipiutak specimens had been for- recorded as follows (Table 1): warded from New York on September 18 by insured parcel Table 1. Mail consigned to Whittier postmaster post, leading her to assume that they could not possibly have been on the same ship and should therefore arrive at Quantity Type Weight the college soon after shipping began to move again on 1,166 pcs. SKS mail 52,470 lbs. the Pacific Coast (Weitzner 1946c). On March 24, 1947, 469 pcs. Outside mail 21,105 lbs. Giddings informed Weizner: “I am afraid this is bad news. 29 pcs. Pouches 1st class mail 1,050 lbs. The shipment of Ipiutak material has not been heard from 6 pcs. Outside 1st class mail 20 lbs. at this end, and now the backlog of mail from Seattle and According to McLaren (1988:137): Southern Alaska is largely cleared” (Giddings 1947). It thus appears that although the specimen list was shipped The Zalinski was far down the priority list to have from New York City on September 17 and the specimens radar equipment installed. Navy vessels had a much higher priority. So we had to go up the Inside a day later, they both ended up on the same USAT vessel Passage the “old fashioned way” as ships had been leaving Seattle for Alaska. doing for decades past. They bounced whistles off

90 the lost treasures of ipiutak Figure 3. Brigadier General M. G. Zalinski in U.S. Army Transport Service. Courtesy of Puget Sound Maritime His- torical Society, Williamson Collection Image #1050-1.

the shore and determined the distance from land 2003, the Canadian Coast Guard (CCG) received a re- by the length of the echo. port that something was producing an oil sheen on the McClaren’s account provided further important de- water surface about 1.35 nautical miles southeast of James tails about the voyage. It was raining heavily when the ship Point on the west side of Grenville Channel. On October reached Grenville Channel, British Columbia, making it 30 the Coast Guard deployed its Phantom HD2 remotely next to impossible to navigate, as the heavy rain was muf- operated vehicle (ROV) to investigate the source of the oil; fling all sound. Around three in the morning, the crew during the inspection the Coast Guard determined that was awakened by the ship suddenly taking a severe jolt, the source of the oil was a shipwreck (Gillard 2003). The quickly followed by emergency blasts of the ship’s whistle. vessel was found to be lying upside down on a rock ledge The Zalinski was already listing to starboard when the in 27 m of water; it was approximately 65–70 m long and crew lined up to get in the lifeboats. Reportedly, the force had a single propeller (Fig. 4). The superstructure had col- of the collision broke the nos. 1 and 2 holds wide open—a lapsed so that the hull rested primarily on its bulwarks tear about 12 m long. The ship had struck the rocks off with a list toward deep water. Pitt Island, a few miles south of Lowe Inlet. All forty-eight Jody Goffic, program support officer of the CCG, be- of the Zalinski’s crew were able to get away in the two port gan making inquiries to try to identify the vessel. He con- lifeboats. The veteran steamer sank twenty-five minutes tacted the Vancouver Maritime Museum and subsequently 2 after colliding with the rocks and was reported to have the Underwater Archaeological Society of BC (UASBC). gone down in 152 m of water. Only two vessels were identified as being lost in the vi- cinity of Lowe Inlet: MV Ravalli was a wooden freighter that burned at Lowe Inlet on June 14, 1918, and the steel zalinski is found freighter Zalinski sank in Grenville Channel on September The Zalinski remained forgotten on the bottom of 29, 1946. Eventually, the Coast Guard found a story about Grenville Channel for fifty-seven years. In the summer of the sinking of the Brigadier General M. G. Zalinski in an

Alaska Journal of Anthropology vol. 15, nos. 1&2 (2017) 91 (Fig. 6). The divers found the stern area to be suspended above a drop-off and accessible by swimming up under- neath. They also reported seeing bombs and other material on site, suggesting the ship was a military vessel. The Canadian Navy Fleet Dive Unit conducted re- connaissance dives on the site between June 2 and June 5, 2011. During their dives they found several 250 lb. and 500 lb. bombs and at least two 1000 lb. bombs. While investigating the forward part of the ship, they also lo- cated and recovered the ship’s bell, which is embossed “Lake Frohna”—the name of the Zalinski at the time of her launch.4

was the ipiutak material put aboard zalinski? Figure 4. Multibeam scan of Zalinski looking south from bow. Courtesy Canadian Hydrographic Service. The initial association of the Ipiutak artifacts and Zalinski began in 2005, when Mike Burwell was contacted by an issue of the Prince Rupert Daily News (1946). Further re- Alaskan news reporter looking for information about the search confirmed that the ship specifications were con- lost artifacts. Burwell made contact with Alaska archae- sistent with the Brigadier General M. G. Zalinski. Dives ologists Anne Jensen and Glenn Sheehan in Barrow and completed by two other groups also confirmed that the Owen Mason in Anchorage, all of whom were associ- ship was the Zalinski. A group of technical divers, led by ated with more recent excavations at Point Hope. These Brian Nadwidny, visited the wreck in 2010 and again in contacts confirmed the story of the lost artifacts, but no 2012.3 Nadwidny reported an overturned vessel made of one had ever attempted to identify the lost ship. While steel with a single propeller (Fig. 5), and found some pop searching the Alaska shipwrecks database for likely ships, bottles and truck axles in the bow area on the lower side Burwell found McGillivary’s (2006) article on the internet.

Figure 5. Photograph showing Zalinski propeller, courtesy of Brian Nadwidny.

92 the lost treasures of ipiutak Figure 6. Photograph showing truck axle, courtesy of Brian Nadwidny.

At the same time he made contact with British Columbia four days. Assuming that it arrived on September 22 or maritime historian Rick James, who was researching the 23, there would have been plenty of time for it to have Zalinski for the book Historic Shipwrecks of the Central been consigned to the Zalinski. The fact that it never made Coast (James and Marc 2010). The convergence of this re- it to Alaska hints strongly that the material was aboard search convinced Burwell that the Zalinski had carried the the Zalinski. There are no other reports of a USAT vessel Ipiutak artifacts back to Alaska.5 sinking during this same time period on the West Coast. There is a strong likelihood that the Ipiutak mate- To further support the above supposition, the reader will rial was aboard the Zalinski based on the evidence. An recall that Bella Weitzner of the AMNH recounted in her AMNH “Shipping Notice and Request for Packing” was correspondence with the University of Alaska that the post completed on September 16, 1946. The packing slip list- office notified them on or around November 8, 1946, that ed a single package containing archaeological specimens the army transport carrying the letter and the accompany- from Point Hope, Alaska (identified as the property of ing lists had sunk, and presumably the mail it carried was the University of Alaska); it was addressed to Mr. Ivar lost. A footnote at the bottom of the AMNH shipping no- Skarland, University of Alaska College, Alaska, and in- tice reads: “Tracer—March 27, 1947. ‘Boat sunk material sured for $500. A note on the back of the packing slip and list lost.’” A further note on the back of the shipping reads, “Tracer Pkg September 18, V44845 insured $200 notice reads, “US Army Transport Brig. Gen. Zalinski Fee $1.88. Sept 17, Letter Rec. 462440—59 cents.” One Lost—Sept. 29, 1946.” The final note suggests the author must assume that this note was made by a staffer at the knew about the potential loss and which vessel the mate- AMNH after the artifacts had been shipped. rial may have been on. A shipping strike in Seattle during the fall of 1946 meant that much of the mail and food shipments to what to do about the oil leak? Alaska were being handled by U.S. Army Transport ships. We know from an Army ocean manifest that, in After determining what was producing the oil slick in addition to general cargo, the Zalinski loaded mail con- Grenville Channel, the CCG hired commercial divers to signed to the postmaster in Whittier. If the mail contain- patch the small holes that were allowing the oil to escape. ing the Ipiutak artifacts had been put on a train leaving The vessel continued to release oil on and off for several New York, it would have made it to Seattle in three to more years (O’Neil 2006). In September 2013 the Coast

Alaska Journal of Anthropology vol. 15, nos. 1&2 (2017) 93 Guard began to make preparations to remove the oil from Brian Nadwidny and his group explored down to the Zalinski. Upon learning about this endeavor through 61 m. He stated that there are artifacts including several the media, the UASBC advised the Coast Guard, by way portholes, more bombs, and a helm on a ledge in deep wa- of the BC Archaeology Branch, that the vessel was pro- ter. Also, he said that they were able to enter and explore tected by the British Columbia Heritage Conservation Act the rear hold, but that there was not much in it. If the and potentially contained a cargo of culturally significant artifacts were in the aft hold, they are likely lost. If they artifacts. Initially, there was some resistance to dealing are in one of the forward holds, there is a good chance with the heritage aspects of the wreck, as the Coast Guard that they are still within the vessel buried amongst the considered the Zalinski a United States military vessel and other cargo. To know where to look would require learn- as such the British Columbia Heritage Conservation Act ing where the mail might have been carried on the ship. would not apply. The UASBC stressed that even if the To date we have not been able to find a cargo stowage Zalinski was not covered under the Heritage Conservation layout as to where it might have been in the vessel. The Act, there was international and United States legislation second challenge would be to understand what to look governing sunken warships to consider. for. To determine what might be in the package, Alaska The author contacted the AMNH on October 10, historian and researcher Mike Burwell went through 2013, to try and confirm if there was evidence linking the plates in the Larsen-Rainey report and itemized the the missing artifacts to the Zalinski. The AMNH in turn University of Alaska specimens that were missing and provided key documentation (cited earlier) that substan- their accession numbers. By Burwell’s count, there were tially confirmed that the Zalinski had the Ipiutak artifacts 223 separate artifacts wrapped, packed, and shipped by on board. After being briefed about the potential Ipiutak the AMNH.7 The contents of the package includes ivo- cargo, the Coast Guard agreed to be on the lookout for ry, bone, and stone objects in the form of arrowheads, this material in the course of their work, and if anything stone implements, bone implements, blades, carvings, was found, they would limit any action to documenting and burial masks. Given the sheer number of artifacts, we and visually recording the location of the collection.6 The have concluded that the shipping box would have been oil recovery went ahead without incident during October at least the size of a small moving box, perhaps 60 x 60 and November 2013. The bunker C oil tanks were tapped x 60 cm, and most likely made of wood to protect the through the upturned hull so little or no wreck penetra- artifacts from damage. After seventy years underwater, it tion was warranted. As such, no evidence of the artifacts is unlikely that the box would remain intact. Even if the was found. Approximately 44,000 liters of heavy bunker wood held up, the nails would have rusted out years ago, C oil were removed from the wreck. which means the box would at the very least have fallen apart. If the box was packed tightly amongst other mail what is the likelihood of finding cargo, there is a strong chance the artifacts would remain the ipiutak artifacts? tightly grouped. If the box was placed in an unsecured area, the artifacts could be spread around a larger area. The Coast Guard ROV inspection identified that the ves- If the box was on top of the mail, it would have become sel lies upside down on a rock ledge in 27 m of water buried when the vessel rolled upside down. (Gillard 2003). The superstructure has collapsed so that the hull rests primarily on its bulwarks with a list toward conclusion deep water. The bow is facing north—the direction in which the vessel was headed at the time of her sinking. Based on the evidence presented, it is highly probable that The hull is buckled about one-third of the way back from the Ipiutak treasure is aboard the Zalinski. The Sunken the stern. The top of the upturned hull is in 19 m of water, Military Craft Act of 2005, Sections 1401–1408 con- and the propeller is at 24 m. The navy divers reported that firms right, title, and interest of the United States in and there is some restricted access to forward hold no. 1 while to any U.S. sunken military craft anywhere in the world. holds no. 2 and 3 appear to be completely inaccessible. This means the U.S. Army would still have rights to the The hatch opening to hold no. 4 hangs over a drop-off, Zalinski. As such, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric and much of its contents have spilled out into deep water. Administration would likely be the responsible agency for the management of the submerged cultural heritage

94 the lost treasures of ipiutak ­resources aboard Zalinski. Given the upside-down nature acknowledgements of the wreck, its deteriorating condition, and the presence of ordnance, trying to locate the artifacts could become an Kristen Mable, archivist in the Division of Anthropology, expensive and risky operation. The most important ques- at the American Museum of Natural History, for provid- tion to be answered is: Are there any artifacts in the lost ing correspondence regarding the shipping and loss of collection that are not represented in the three Ipiutak re- Ipiutak artifacts. positories (i.e., University of Alaska Museum, the Danish Brian Nadwidny for describing and providing video Museum, and the AMNH)? If the answer is yes, and it can footage of his dives on the Zalinski. be shown that there are some obvious and significant over- Mike Burwell, who made the initial association of sights in the current collections, only then should search- the Zalinski and the Ipiutak artifacts, for assisting with ing the ship be contemplated. To search the ship would re- research, providing advice, and compiling a list of the 223 quire further research to determine where the mail would missing Ipiutak artifacts. have been stored. Divers could be used to inspect accessible Scott Shirar, Archaeology Collections manager at the areas of the ship. However, it is likely that the artifacts are University of Alaska Museum of the North in Fairbanks, in one of the currently inaccessible holds or even in an en- for providing correspondence regarding the Ipiutak collec- closed interior space. To locate them would require the use tions from the 1940s and 1978. of a small ROV capable of operating in confined spaces. An alternate approach would be to use divers with pole- references mounted video cameras that could be inserted into open- ings in the hull to inspect the contents of each space. If Bandi, Hans-Georg by chance the artifacts were located, the second challenge 1969 Eskimo Prehistory. Translated by Ann Keep. Uni- would be how to remove them safely from the wreck us- versity of Alaska Press, Fairbanks. ing recognized archaeological techniques. Recovery comes Giddings, J. Louis with its own baggage. What sort of conditions would the 1946 Letter to Bella Weitzner dated November 11. artifacts be in? Obviously, the stone implements would be Correspondence: UA1-1941 accession file, Uni- fine. However, the bone and ivory pieces would require versity of Alaska Museum of the North Archaeol- immediate on-site conservation. While we now have solid ogy Department, University of Alaska Fairbanks. evidence suggesting that we know where the Ipiutak trea- 1947 Letter to Bella Weitzner dated March 24. Corre- sures are, it may be that the challenges to their recovery are spondence UA1-1941 accession file, University of insurmountable. Alaska Museum of the North Archaeology De- partment, University of Alaska Fairbanks. 1967 Ancient Men of the Arctic. Alfred A. Knopf Inc., notes New York. 1. John Fitzgerald, e-mail message to Mike Burwell re- Gillard, Bryce. garding mail manifest (August 29, 2013). 2003 Shipwreck Located in Grenville Channel October 2003. 2. Jody Goffic, e-mail message to Susan Buss at the Digital Video and Sonar Imagery Narra- tive. Canadian Coast Guard, Prince Rupert. Vancouver Maritime Museum seeking identity of wreck (October 16, 2003). Hilton, Charles E., Benjamin M. Auerbach, and Libby W. 3. Brian Nadwidny, e-mail message to author regarding Cowgill The Foragers of Point Hope: The Biology and Ar- wreck condition (June 24, 2010). 2014 chaeology of Humans on the Edge of the Alaskan 4. Rob DeProy, e-mail message to author regarding Arctic. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. wreck condition and bell recovery (August 15, 2011). 5. Mike Burwell, e-mail message to author concerning James, Rick, and Jacques Marc Historic Shipwrecks of the Central Coast of British Zalinski–Ipiutak relationship (June 5, 2015). 2010 Columbia. Underwater Archaeological Society of 6. Mike Grebler, e-mail messages to author regarding oil British Columbia, Vancouver. removal plans (October 7, 8, and 17, 2013). 7. Mike Burwell, e-mail message to author regarding list of lost artifacts (October 16, 2013).

Alaska Journal of Anthropology vol. 15, nos. 1&2 (2017) 95 Larsen, Helge, and Froelich Rainey Prince Rupert Daily News 1948 Ipiutak and the Arctic Whale Hunting Culture. 1946 Army Transport Sinks in Grenville Channel. Anthropological Papers Vol. 42. American Mu- September 30. seum of Natural History, New York. Weitzner, Bella Mason, Owen K. 1946a Letter to Ivar Skarland dated September 16. Cor- 2006 Ipiutak Remains Mysterious: A Focal Place Still respondence: Box 132, Folder 10, Division of Out of Focus. In Dynamics of Northern Societies: Anthropology Archives, American Museum of Proceedings of the SILA/NABO Conference on Arc- Natural History, New York. tic and North Atlantic Archaeology, edited by Jette 1946b Letter to Ivar Skarland dated November 7. Cor- Arneborg and Bjarne Gronnøw, pp. 103–119. respondence: UA1-1941 accession file, University Studies in Archaeology and History Vol. 10, Na- of Alaska Museum of the North Archaeology tional Museum of Denmark, Copenhagen. Department, University of Alaska Fairbanks. 2016 From the Norton Culture to the Ipiutak Cult in 1946c Latter to J. Louis Giddings dated November 18. Northwest Alaska. In The Oxford Handbook of Correspondence: UA1-1941 accession file, Uni- the Prehistoric Arctic, edited by T. Max Friesen versity of Alaska Museum of the North Archaeol- and Owen K. Mason, pp. 442–467. Oxford Uni- ogy Department, University of Alaska Fairbanks. versity Press, Oxford. 1947 Letter to J. Louis Giddings dated March 28. Cor- McLaren, Archie respondence UA1-1941 accession file, University 1988 The Saga of the U.S.A.T. Brig. General M. G. of Alaska Museum of the North Archaeology Zalinski­ . The Sea Chest: Journal of the Puget Sound Department, University of Alaska Fairbanks. Maritime Historical Society 21(1):136–139. West, Eugene McGillivary, P. A. 1978 Internal memorandum regarding fate of Ipiutak 2006 Recovering the Lost Treasures of Ipiutak (Pt. Hope) Material. UA1-1941 accession file, University of Alaska. Proceedings of the Oceans 2005 MTS/ Alaska Museum of the North Archaeology De- IEEE Conference and Exhibition, Washington, partment, University of Alaska Fairbanks. DC, pp. 1122–1129. O’Neil, Peter 2006a Canada Seeks Help to Raise Bomb-Laden Ship Off West Coast. Victoria Times-Colonist (May 11).

96 the lost treasures of ipiutak